SEZ plan ignores local ideas of development
On May 12, Kaireeya Ramanya, a young girl from a sleepy fishing village in Songkhla’s Chana district, wrote a letter to Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha. This is a task that the 17-year-old — who staged a sit-in protest against a mega-development project known as the Southern Economic Zone (SEZ) — had never dreamed of doing.
Her letter was to bring to the PM’s attention the impact of the SEZ on several hundred villages in tambon Nathap, Taling Chan and Sakom. The young protester voiced her grievances about state authorities’ ill attempts to promote the scheme — including its plan to hold a public forum on the megaproject on May 14-20.
The timing of Kaireeya’s solo protest in front of the Songkhla Provincial Hall certainly wasn’t normal, as it is still the holy month of Ramadan for Muslims in the South, and lest we forget, travel restrictions meant to curb the spread of Covid-19 are still in place. That said, so was the timing of the public forum, which raised doubts about state’s sincerity in involving the public in the process.
Few people would be able to attend, and fewer still are the number of people who were aware of the planned forum, she said. “Those who live outside the three tambons [designated as the scheme’s site] but are affected by the development couldn’t make it,” she added. Isn’t the entire process bogus then?
Back in January, the government earmarked 19 billion baht for the SEZ, which aims to transform Chana’s coastal area into an industrial and logistics hub. Spanning 6,000 rai, the project includes a deep-sea port, energy plant, high-tech factories hosting both light and heavy industries. The project’s proponents claim the project would eventually create more than 100,000 jobs.
Kaireeya questioned the cost of the development, the environmental destruction and the loss of resources that she and her fellow villagers would have to bear if the SEZ is implemented. She sees this development in another light.
“Almost 100% of my family’s income comes from fishing. My house, my clothes, my shoes, uniforms, tuition fees, even the bicycle I ride. All the happiness in my life,” she said, pleading the PM not to destroy their prospects.
Her protest was picked up by social media, not the mainstream outlets. But it added to the criticism which pushed the Southern Border Provinces Administration Centre to scrap the forum. We cannot call this a victory, though.
Certainly, pro-industry elements in the government will continue to push for the SEZ. There are reports that influential petro-chemical tycoons, with close ties to the military, are eyeing this scheme. It’s the same group of industrialists who in 1980s turned the country’s pristine eastern region into an industrial hub under the eastern seaboard project.
What’s different between the eastern seaboard and the SEZ is the latter has faced strong local opposition from the start. It’s the same resistance which crippled the deep-sea port proposal in 1997. The natural gas processing plants and pipeline to Malaysia, operated by state enterprises, also caused clashes between the operator and local communities.
Kaireeya grew up with stories of chronic conflicts which have made her question the virtue of state initiatives like the SEZ, which is pushed by technocrats and industrialists alike.
Industrial development isn’t what Kaireeya and her community members dream about, as they see the region’s potential for ecotourism and sustainable seafood production, which would enable them to maintain food security. It is clear there’s a dichotomy regarding development models for the region.
My impression is that our policymakers and tycoons still cling to the idea that rural people are backward, just like decades ago. They believe that country people have low competitiveness and poor skills. With that false belief, they see factory jobs as the way to improve the villagers’ livelihoods. They have no idea about the changes in rural areas due to new technology. No more buffalos and ignorant farmers — at least not in this area, where many don’t want a 9-to-5 job in factories. They dream of independent jobs, even becoming entrepreneurs.
I met many of them: a young man starting an e-commerce business; a group of artists who want to attract eco-tourists, and a fisherman’s family who earns a large income from selling premium seafood to suppliers in Bangkok and Malaysia.
Evidently, state policy-makers have failed to catch up with the times. That’s why they cling on to the 1980s development model based largely on dirty industries, with heavy costs on the environment.
It’s their love affair with factory jobs which are to blame for the country’s low competitiveness.
It’s not too late to make a U-turn. If they don’t know how, I suggest they listen to Kaireeya’s messages seriously.